Al Gore on Iraq and torture

[Sayhey]

Al Gore gave a speech before a meeting organized by MoveOn.org. It is all fire and outrage - it is a wonderful speech. It makes me wish he had spoken with the same passion in 2000. Here is a sample:

The soldiers who are accused of committing these atrocities are, of course, responsible for their own actions and if found guilty, must be severely and appropriately punished. But they are not the ones primarily responsible for the disgrace that has been brought upon the United States of America.

Private Lynndie England did not make the decision that the United States would not observe the Geneva Convention. Specialist Charles Graner was not the one who approved a policy of establishing an American Gulag of dark rooms with naked prisoners to be "stressed" and even - we must use the word - tortured - to force them to say things that legal procedures might not induce them to say.

These policies were designed and insisted upon by the Bush White House. Indeed, the President's own legal counsel advised him specifically on the subject. His secretary of defense and his assistants pushed these cruel departures from historic American standards over the objections of the uniformed military, just as the Judge Advocates General within the Defense Department were so upset and opposed that they took the unprecedented step of seeking help from a private lawyer in this city who specializes in human rights and said to him, "There is a calculated effort to create an atmosphere of legal ambiguity" where the mistreatment of prisoners is concerned."

Indeed, the secrecy of the program indicates an understanding that the regular military culture and mores would not support these activities and neither would the American public or the world community. Another implicit acknowledgement of violations of accepted standards of behavior is the process of farming out prisoners to countries less averse to torture and giving assignments to private contractors

President Bush set the tone for our attitude for suspects in his State of the Union address. He noted that more than 3,000 "suspected terrorists" had been arrested in many countries and then he added, "and many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: they are no longer a problem to the United States and our allies."

George Bush promised to change the tone in Washington. And indeed he did. As many as 37 prisoners may have been murdered while in captivity, though the numbers are difficult to rely upon because in many cases involving violent death, there were no autopsies.

How dare they blame their misdeeds on enlisted personnel from a Reserve unit in upstate New York. President Bush owes more than one apology. On the list of those he let down are the young soldiers who are themselves apparently culpable, but who were clearly put into a moral cesspool. The perpetrators as well as the victims were both placed in their relationship to one another by the policies of George W. Bush.

Here (http://www.moveonpac.org/goreremarks052604.html/) is the whole speech.

[zimv20]

i wish he had such a fire in the 2000 election. but i'm glad he's saying this now.

[Backtothemac]

i wish he had such a fire in the 2000 election. but i'm glad he's saying this now.

Had he showed that passion. I would have voted for him. He wrote one of the most wonderful pro-life speeches I have ever heard.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I just wish i would have voted for Al instead of the Dubya. Dubya has led us on a goose chase at over 100 billion meanwhile Osama is still roaming around. The policies in place for Iraq was George's doing. He is in charge and scooted the geneva convention along with some of our own rights with Patriot Act. Did he ever stop the millions coming in way of mexico? nope. Lost all my faith in this man and perhaps the Republican party for awhile.

[Krizoitz]

Didn't Al gore invent torture ;)

[Sayhey]

Didn't Al gore invent torture ;)

No, but I'm sure that this is really all Clinton's fault. I heard somewhere that Rush or Hannity were blaming it all on the loose morals of the Clinton Presidency - the soldiers involved were mostly young kids when they heard about Bill and Monica - so they had to be corrupted by the news! Yep, if you have a consenting adults having oral sex, the next thing you know we have torture in Iraq. Cause and effect. Makes sense to me! :eek:

[blackfox]

Bravo...(I echo the sentiments of sahey and zim)...makes you wonder about the mettle and character of a man, once he is divorced from the horse-and-pony show of modern politics...in relation to the coming election, I believe we have discerned the character of Bush through the PR haze, and Kerry remains to be seen, although he is bound to be superior to Bush, and perhaps superior to many peoples expectations once off the campaign trail...

Not that this has any bearing to probable reality, but might Gore be a potential VP once again (for Kerry)? I, for one, have been very impressed with him since his handling of the 2000 election till now...whether he would be an asset or a liability to Kerry in the minds of most voters, I do not know...and I am not even sure Gore would be interested...

[zimv20]

i think you can tell a lot about a man by what he does once he leaves the white house.

[jelloshotsrule]

quite impressive. just another person to say "if only he'd been like this 4 years ago...".

this, along with his early writing on the environment, etc. are the real al gore i hope. whereas the passionless, uninspiring figure from the election year was just a result of the current election system... he wasn't speaking for himself in the speeches then, but rather for the companies backing him. now that he's flying solo, his true, brilliant colors come out

[trebblekicked]

...snip...whether he would be an asset or a liability to Kerry in the minds of most voters, I do not know...and I am not even sure Gore would be interested...

liability, sorry to say. he was "defined" all too well by rove & co. in 2000.

on the subject of gore's speech- i love it, but unfortunately this kind of spunk gets you nowhere fast in mainstream politics. just ask howard dean.

[numediaman]

From our friends at the RNC:


RNC Communications Director Statement on Al Gore’s Comments Today at MoveOn.org Rally

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Christine Iverson
202-863-8614

Washington, DC—RNC Communications Director Jim Dyke issued the following statement today in response to a speech by former Vice President Al Gore attacking President Bush.

“Al Gore served as Vice President of this country for eight years. During that time, Osama Bin Laden declared war on the United States five times and terrorists killed US citizens on at least four different occasions including the first bombing of the World Trade Center, the attacks on Khobar Towers, our embassies in East Africa, and the USS Cole.”

“Al Gore’s attacks on the President today demonstrate that he either does not understand the threat of global terror, or he has amnesia

Yup, Gore's responsible for 9/11, the Iraq War, and tooth decay, as well.

[screener]

Don't Hurt Me

Glad to see some Republicans are brave enough to
go against the flow.
I'd like to know what you saw in Bush that made you
think he'd be a good President.
Before the election I heard a lot of Republican "pundints"
admitting he wasn't the brightest in the party but he
had a lot of good people around him.
That worked out well, but I thought in the U.S. you voted
for the man not the party so much.
Why would you vote for a guy like Bush?

[Stelliform]

.....

[Sayhey]

IMO those statements about Clinton have the same merit as all of the attacks against Bush. Clinton wasn't a saint, and he does bear some responsibility for 9/11 and the former recession. (And we all know that Bush was blamed for these events.)

What I think Hannity and Rush are doing is illustrating how you can blame anyone for anything, like the Bush haters are blaming Bush for the prison abuse. (Which I think is completely absurd.)

These last years have been an major and possibly successful test of a louder minority overrunning the quiet majority.

I take it the louder minority you are talking about aren't the thugs the GOP sent to Florida to stop the recounts? Kindly remember who was the minority in the last Presidential vote.

The trouble with your approach is it ends with no accountability; that is, at least, for those in the Bush administration. You say that blaming Bush for the prison abuse is completely absurd, but you never deal with the specifics of the case. If, as it looks to be true, that the decision to set aside the Geneva convention protections was taken at the highest levels of the White House, who should we hold accountable? The six or seven MPs? I don't think they sat in on that meeting.

This is a President who can't even remember something he did wrong. This while Rome - excuse me - Iraq burns. Harry Truman is rolling over in his grave.

[IJ Reilly]

We're in the midst of a debate-transformation campaign, where all criticisms of White House policies and programs are immediately characterized as "attacks," and therefore to be seen as the moral equivalent of the most vile, frightening and untruthful statements made by the right-wing attack dogs. This is how important debates becomes something far more elemental, closer to a propaganda war than open discussion.

[mactastic]

Any attack on the president is 'political hate speech' don'tcha know? Whatever the hell THAT is. :rolleyes:

[Neserk]

I don't get why people choose to vote for the people they do. What the heck does "passion" have to do with being a good president? Seems to me that someone who is level headed and calm is going to make a better leader than someone who is "passionate."

[Sayhey]

I don't get why people choose to vote for the people they do. What the heck does "passion" have to do with being a good president? Seems to me that someone who is level headed and calm is going to make a better leader than someone who is "passionate."

Being a good leader often means the ability to win people to your view. If folks don't think you believe in what you are saying it makes it very hard to do so. In 2000 the greatest knock the GOP had on Gore was that he wasn't sincere about what he said. A little of this passion would have gone a long way to convince voters that Gore cared for ideas and ideals instead of just getting elected. In short, passion for what is right is a very important part of leading any nation. Not that it is the whole game - there is that thing about being competent.

[Voltron]

I take it the louder minority you are talking about aren't the thugs the GOP sent to Florida to stop the recounts? Kindly remember who was the minority in the last Presidential vote.

as opposed to the ones Gore sent to try to force them to recount only in democratic districts. :confused:

[Voltron]

The trouble with your approach is it ends with no accountability; that is, at least, for those in the Bush administration. You say that blaming Bush for the prison abuse is completely absurd, but you never deal with the specifics of the case. If, as it looks to be true, that the decision to set aside the Geneva convention protections was taken at the highest levels of the White House, who should we hold accountable? The six or seven MPs? I don't think they sat in on that meeting.


FYI the geneva convention doesn't apply to those enemy combatants captured while out of uniform.

[Neserk]

Being a good leader often means the ability to win people to your view.

While that is true, that is the fault of the people. People should be making informed choices based on factual information and their own personal values. Not on how persuasive someone is.

It doesn't seem a good thing to let everyone know that "I'm going to vote for the person who can persuade me to their view." It makes more sense (to me) to say "I'm going to vote for the person who mostly closely represents me."

[Thanatoast]

FYI the geneva convention doesn't apply to those enemy combatants captured while out of uniform.Guess that means we can throw human dignity and common sense out the window...

[skunk]

FYI the geneva convention doesn't apply to those enemy combatants captured while out of uniform.
I believe that there is an additional protocol which ensures that it does.

[jelloshotsrule]

While that is true, that is the fault of the people. People should be making informed choices based on factual information and their own personal values. Not on how persuasive someone is.

It doesn't seem a good thing to let everyone know that "I'm going to vote for the person who can persuade me to their view." It makes more sense (to me) to say "I'm going to vote for the person who mostly closely represents me."

well i didn't vote for gore based on the facts. so he would've had to "persuade" me that he was changing his approach... ie, not just being a corporate pawn

he didn't. so i didn't vote for him. that simple

[IJ Reilly]

Speaking of hate speech, Media Matters for America found no less than 12 right-wing commentators over the last couple of days who diagnosed Al Gore with a clinical psychiatric disorder.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405280001

Apparently the RNC doesn't have any problem finding prominent pundits willing to lip-sync to their talking points.

[Neserk]

well i didn't vote for gore based on the facts. so he would've had to "persuade" me that he was changing his approach... ie, not just being a corporate pawn



No, but you effectually voted for Bush.

[takao]

Speaking of hate speech, Media Matters for America found no less than 12 right-wing commentators over the last couple of days who diagnosed Al Gore with a clinical psychiatric disorder.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200405280001

Apparently the RNC doesn't have any problem finding prominent pundits willing to lip-sync to their talking points.

if i were an american i would be worried about such commentators.... truly disgusting... obviously somebody is lacking arguments and has to use insults to compansate

i mean when i read something like "What really troubles me about these photos, above and beyond what's in them, is how they're being used to undermine our war effort." by Limbaugh..... i'm suddenly reminded to this quote:

Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship... voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
Hermann Goering, From a conversation with psychologist Gustave Gilbert while jailed at Nuremburg on the evening of 18 April 1946, documented in Gilbert's book "Nuremburg Diary."

[skunk]

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose....